Abstract
Orientation: Researchers need to assess the psychometric rigour of resilience measuring scales. Research purpose: The purpose of the study was to assess the psychometric properties of the South African Adult Resilience Indicator (ARI).Motivation for the study: Researchers have not previously published the psychometric properties of the South African Adult Resilience Indicator.Research design, approach and method: The authors used a cross-sectional quantitative research design. A sample of 789 young adults participated in the study. Cross-validation allowed the authors to confirm (using the validation sample) the validity of the ARI structure they obtained during initial testing (using the calibration sample). They investigated two measurement models (the original factor structure and a one-dimensional factor structure).Main findings: The original factor structure presented the data and the proposed theory better than did the one-dimensional factor structure. The authors found acceptable goodness of fit for the ARI. More specifically, they found invariance (in terms of equal factor loadings,covariances and error variances) in the calibration and validation samples. They also found acceptable reliability estimates for each of the eight sub-scales.Practical/managerial implications: The results can help researchers and practitioners interested in measuring resilience in adults to choose a resilience measure and to select an appropriate measure for their populations and contexts.Contribution/value-add: Previous research has clearly shown that reliable and valid resilience measures are necessary. It is also necessary to assess the psychometric properties of the currently available instruments and to publish the findings. This study has helped by examining the psychometric properties of the South African Adult Resilience Indicator.
Highlights
Background to the studyResearch into resilience has increased substantially over the past two decades
Both the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and SRMR are below the recommended cut-off
The results show that the psychometric properties of the Adult Resilience Indicator (ARI) are adequate
Summary
Research into resilience has increased substantially over the past two decades. This interest is because of a move away from ‘deficit’ models of illness and psychopathology because resilience theory focuses on understanding healthy development despite risk and on strengths rather than on weaknesses (Windle, Bennett & Noyes, 2011). Most of the research on psychological resilience originates from the world of developmental psychology. Up to now, it has focused primarily on the resilience of at-risk children, problem adolescents and dysfunctional families (Luthans, Youssef & Avolio, 2007; Visser, 2007). Positive psychologists recognise that resilience involves everyday skills and psychological strengths that one can identify, measure, maintain and nurture in people of all ages and psychological conditions (Masten & Reed, 2002)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
